Melanie Blocker-Stokes Postpartum Depression Research and Care Act

Madam. Speaker, due to events in my district, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 42: Passage of H. Res. 475. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

January 22, 2007

Madam Speaker, due to events in my district, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 43: Table the appeal of the ruling of the Chair for H. Res. 476. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Madam Speaker, due to events in my district, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 44: Motion to Suspend the Rules and Agree to H. Res. No. 52. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Madam Speaker, due to events in my district, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 45: Motion to suspend the rules and Agreed to H.R. 390. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Madam Speaker, due to events in my district, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 46: Motion to Suspend the Rules and Agree to H. Res. 29. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

February 8, 2007

Madam Speaker, due to events in my district, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 87: Agreeing to the Amendment of H.R. 547, and amendment to include language which encourages the Assistant Administrator to utilize Land Grant Institutions, Historically Black Colleges and Universities, Hispanic Serving Institutions and other minority serving institutions among other resources to undertake research for programs covered by the bill. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Madam Speaker, due to events in my district. I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 88: Agreeing to the Amendment of H.R. 547, an amendment to add a new paragraph to section 3, Biofuel Infrastructure and Additives Research and Development, to include issues with respect to where in the fuel supply chain additives optimally should be added to fuels. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Madam Speaker, due to events in my district, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 89: Agreeing to the Amendment of H.R. 547, an amendment to add a new paragraph to section 3 which includes issues with respect to certification by a nationally recognized testing laboratory of components for fuel dispensing devices that specifically reference compatibility with alcohol blended and biofuels that contain greater than 15 percent alcohol. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Madam Speaker, due to events in my district, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 90: Agreeing to the Amendment of H.R. 547, an amendment to add a new section 7 entitled Additional Funding. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Madam Speaker, due to events in my district, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 91:

the Motion to Recommit with Instructions of H.R. 547. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no.''

Madam Speaker, due to events in my district, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 92: Passage of H.R. 547. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

February 28, 2007

Madam Speaker, due to events in my district, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 111: Motion to Suspend the Rules and Agree on H. Con. Res. 52. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

March 12, 2007

Madam Speaker, due to events in my district, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 136: Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass, as Amended on H.R. 85. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Madam Speaker, due to events in my district, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 137: Motion to Suspend the Rules and Agree on H. Res. 136. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Madam Speaker, due to events in my district, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 138: Motion to Suspend the Rules and Agree on H. Res. 89. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Madam Speaker, due to events in my district, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 187: Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass, as amended on H.R. 802. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Madam speaker, due to events in my district, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 188: Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass, as Amended on H.R. 137. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Madam Speaker, due to events in my district, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 189: Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass, as Amended on H.R. 580. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

May 14, 2007

Madam Speaker, due to events in my district, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 342: Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass on H.R. 1124. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Madam Speaker, due to events in my district, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 343: Motion to suspend the rules and agree to H. Res. 223. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Madam Speaker, due to events in my district, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 344: Motion to Suspend the Rules and Agree (H. Res. 385). Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

May 16, 2007

Madam Speaker, due to events in my district, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 358: Call in Committee Quorum. Had I been present, I would have voted ``present.''

Madam Speaker, due to events in my district, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 359: Motion that the Committee Rise (H.R. 1585). Had I been present, I would have voted ``no.''

June 11, 2007

Madam Speaker, due to events in my district. I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 448: Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass on H.R. 2356. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Madam Speaker, due to events in my district, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 449: Motion to Suspend the Rules and Agree on S. 676. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Madam Speaker, due to events in my district. I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 450: Motion to Suspend the Rules and Agree on H. Res. 418. Had I been present I would have voted ``yes.''

July 23, 2007

Madam Speaker, due to events in my district, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 687: Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass H.R. 404, as amended. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Madam Speaker, due to events in my district, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 688: Motion to suspend the rules and agree to H. Res. 553. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Madam Speaker, due to events in my district, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 689: Motion to suspend the rules and agree to H. Res. 519. Had I been present I would have voted ``yes.''

Madam Speaker, due to events in my district, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 690: On ordering the previous question on H. Res. 558. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

August 1, 2007

Madam Speaker, due to events in my district, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 781: Motion to adjourn. Had I been present. I would have voted ``no.''

september 4, 2007

Madam Speaker, due to events in my district, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 847: Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass H.R. 694, as amended. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Madam Speaker, due to events in my district, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 848: Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass H.R. 3020, as amended. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Madam Speaker, due to events in my district, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 849: Motion to Instruct Conferees on H.R. 2669. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no.''

september 17, 2007

Madam Speaker, due to events in my district, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 867: Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass H.R. 3246, as amended. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Madam Speaker, due to events in my district, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 868: Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass H.R. 1657, as amended. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Madam Speaker, due to events in my district, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 869: Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass H.R. 3527. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

october 1, 2007

Madam Speaker, due to events in my district, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 924: Motion to Suspend the Rules and Agree on H. Res. 185. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Madam Speaker, due to events in my district, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 925: Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass H.R. 2276. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Madam Speaker, due to events in my district, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 926: Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass H.R. 3325. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

october 15, 2007

Madam Speaker, due to events in my district, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 961: Motion to Suspend the Rules and Agree on H. Res. 738. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Madam Speaker, due to events in my district, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 962: Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass H.R. 2089. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Madam Speaker, due to events in my district, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 963: Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass H.R. 20, as amended. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

October 17, 2007

Madam Speaker, due to events in my district, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 980: Passage of H.R. 2095. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

october 29, 2007

Madam Speaker, due to events in my district, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 1010: Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass H.R. 3224, as amended. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Madam Speaker, due to events in my district, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 1011: Motion to Suspend the Rules and Agree on H. Res. 573, as amended. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Madam Speaker, due to events in my district, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 1012: Motion to Suspend the Rules and Agree on H. Res. 747. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

November 5, 2007

Madam Speaker, due to events in my district, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 1034: Closing Portions of the Conference on H.R. 3222. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Madam Speaker, due to events in my district, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 1035: Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass H.R. 513, as amended. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Madam Speaker, due to events in my district, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 1036: Motion to Suspend the Rules and Agree on H. Res. 744. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

november 7, 2007

Madam Speaker, due to events in my district, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 1058: Motion to Suspend the Rules and Agree on H. Con. Res. 236, as amended. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

november 13, 2007

Madam Speaker, due to events in my district, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 1082: Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass H.R. 3315. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Madam Speaker, due to events in my district, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 1083: Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass H.R. 1593, as amended. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Madam Speaker, due to events in my district, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 1084: Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass H.R. 3403, as amended. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Madam Speaker, due to events in my district, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 1085: Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass H.R. 3461, as amended. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

november 14, 2007

Madam Speaker, due to events in my district, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 1095: Motion to Adjourn. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no.''

december 6, 2007

Madam Speaker, due to events in my district, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 1141: Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass H.R. 2085. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. President, I wish to speak about a casualty of the budget process. It is a very disheartening development, and I hope it is an oversight, not the first symbol of the new Democratic Congress's education agenda because I don't think it should be, and I cannot believe that it would be. I don't believe that the Senator from Massachusetts, the Senator from Iowa, the Senator from Rhode Island, and others who care about education would agree that killing the Teacher Incentive Fund should be held up and said here is the way the Democrats plan to approach education. But, in fact, that is what came over from the House of Representatives. What they did was kill a Federal program, passed in a bipartisan way in No Child Left Behind called the Teacher Incentive Fund. They reduced the Teacher Incentive Fund from $100 million a year to $200,000 in this current year. What does the program do? It helps reward outstanding teachers and principals of children who attend low-income, poor-performing schools. That is what it does. This cut threatens a crucial effort to improve the Memphis schools and also other schools all across our country in 16 major cities and States.

It is a disheartening development and one I hope will change. The loudest criticism I hear of the No Child Left Behind bill is it is not properly funded. What kind of response is it to say we are going to knock $100 million out of the most important program that helps to train teachers and principals to help low-income children in poor- performing schools succeed? That doesn't make much sense to me.

So I have submitted an amendment--it is on file--which would increase the teacher incentive fund from $200,000 this year to $99 million, which is the level that was approved in the appropriations bill. It is also the level President Bush requested for the current year. The funding comes out of funds available under the education title of the Labor, HHS, Education section of the joint funding resolution. Unlike a traditional appropriations bill, the resolution doesn't fully allocate all of the dollars under the education title. So as a result, I have been advised by the Legislative Counsel's Office that our amendment doesn't need an offset.

I will add that President Bush, in the budget we received this week, has asked for $200 million for next year. So this would permit us to do what was intended to be done by the No Child Left Behind bill.

I ask unanimous consent that my amendment be printed in the Record at the end of my remarks.

Mr. President, let me mention a few of the details of the Teacher Incentive Fund, so that we can understand what happened in the House of Representatives. The Democratic majority in the House reduced the teacher incentive fund from $99 million to $200,000. The proposed cut jeopardizes 5-year grants that were made to 16 grantees, largely serving big-city schools and low-income students with low academic achievement. The cut will take away funds from Chicago, Denver, Memphis, Houston, Dallas, and Philadelphia. The proposed cut will take away funds from State programs in New Mexico and South Carolina. Many of these programs were developed in full consultation with teachers and principals and with their unions. As an example, Philadelphia's grant application was written and endorsed by the local teachers union. So I am trying to figure out who is against this? It would not be the teachers, principals, or the districts. Neither Democrats nor Republicans. So how did it get cut from $100 million to $200,000?

One of the most critical problems we have to solve today is how to retain outstanding teachers and principals. The more we understand about low-performing schools, the more we understand that, except for the parent, the most important people in that child's ability to succeed are the teacher and the principal. The quality of the teacher and the quality of the school leaders are the most important factors. The elimination of funding, as has been done by the joint funding resolution, could have a significant impact upon the Teacher Incentive Fund. As a result, for example, of the joint funding resolution, the Department of Education has already decided that they will have to delay the national evaluation of the Teacher Incentive Fund until 2008. So we have delayed, for a year, helping these children be exposed to teachers and principals who have more capacity, and we won't learn anything from that evaluation for another extra year.

The proposed cut in funding in the current year will undermine the current grant competition that is going on. Applications are due on February 12, 2007. So say you are sitting in Providence, Knoxville or San Francisco, and you are in the midst of an application to bring in New Leaders for New Schools or some other group, they say to the school district: OK, we will train all your teachers, send them to the Wharton School in the summer and work with them for a year, and on a continuing basis we will help these principals and teachers; we will help the principals become better school leaders. But then the New Leaders for New Schools will say you have to give the principal some autonomy, let them hire and fire the best teachers, let them make decisions. So there is this alliance. In many cases, the teachers union is involved, as in the Philadelphia case. They make concessions. So everybody is working together to try to say: What can we do to help these low-performing schools succeed?

Today, in a roundtable we had about No Child Left Behind, I suggested we are not talking about No Child Left Behind in the correct way. We are catching people doing things wrong instead of catching people doing things right. The truth of the matter is that across our country we have about 100,000 schools, more or less, and in about 75 percent of those schools, they are succeeding in what we call adequate yearly progress. Those schools are succeeding in adequate yearly progress. Now, those schools, I would say, are high-achieving schools. What we find is most of the schools I would call achieving schools. Any school that has succeeded in No Child Left Behind for a couple of years I would call a highest achieving school. One which has succeeded for 1 year would be a high-achieving school. One with only one subgroup of children who don't quite make the standards, I would call that an achieving school. So we have mainly 15, 20 percent of our schools where we need to go to work and do things differently.

These children can succeed. Memphis has a large number of low- performing schools, as we call them, but it is not because the children cannot learn. I was there during spring break last year at one of the new public charter schools in Memphis. They go to school early in the morning and leave at 5 in the afternoon. They were in AP biology courses in the 10th grade. They can all learn. They needed extra help in a different way, and the difference it has made there starts with a good school leader and an excellent teacher. Memphis plans to take this money from the Teacher Incentive Fund and take every single one of its principals through this year-long training, the summer programs, the continuing education, and then Memphis decided to give those teachers autonomy.

So that is what we are killing when we kill this program, not just in Memphis, but in many other school districts. The northern New Mexico network, the DC public schools, the Chicago public schools, Denver, Mare Island Technology Academy in California, Houston, Guilford County, NC, Alaska, the whole State of South Carolina, a couple of districts in Texas--they are all in the middle of this. They are making applications for more. They expect these to be 5-year grants. They are doing what we asked them to do, and then we come along and kill the program right in the middle of the year.

I ask unanimous consent to print after my remarks a list of the current grantees and programs.

Mr. President, following that, I ask unanimous consent to print in the Record a letter from Secretary Margaret Spellings of the Department of Education pointing out what difficulty this decision by the House of Representatives will cause to the teacher incentive fund.

Mr. President, finally, let me make this observation. I was visited today by representatives of the Tennessee Education Association. I have not always gotten along well with the Tennessee Education Association because of the subject we are discussing today. In 1983, I proposed the first master teacher program in the country, the first attempt by a State to pay teachers more for teaching well and to reward principals in the same way. The National Education Association went apoplectic for over a year. We had a brawl for a year and a half. We finally passed a program and our Career Ladder Program lasted for several years, until I got out of office is really what happened, and then it gradually went away. Mr. President, 10,000 teachers were rewarded, paid more, their retirement pay was more, and we talked about that today. I appreciated very much their visit because this includes some teachers who were part of that Career Ladder Program. They are the leadership of the teachers' union, the teachers' association in Tennessee. They came to see me about it, and they were very honest.

They said any program that picks one teacher out and rewards outstanding teaching or rewards an outstanding principal is difficult to do because it is hard to make it fair. But we must do it. Almost everyone agrees that if we make any progress in education, especially with low-income children in poor performing schools, we have to find a way to pay good teachers more and good principals more and keep them in those schools. We have to do it.

So this teacher incentive fund is a real casualty here, and I hope the majority whip, the assistant Democratic leader--he is here--I know he cares deeply about education, about the program in Chicago which is part of this.

Maybe it is an oversight. Maybe it is a casualty that both Republicans and Democrats have had to deal with over the past 2 months. What I hope is, if there are any amendments allowed to this joint funding resolution, this amendment will be one of them. If it is not, I hope we can work together in the Senate, as well as in the House, and do what President Bush has asked us to do, not only put $200 million in for next year, but send a signal to the big city school districts across America: Don't give up, we want to help you train and hire outstanding teachers and outstanding principals.

Exhibit 1

(Purpose: To provide additional funds for the Teacher Incentive Fund)

On page 72, line 20, strike ``of which not to exceed

$200,000'' and insert ``of which $99,000,000''.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Armed Services be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, February 27, 2008, at 9:30 a.m., in open session, and possibly closed session, to receive testimony on the current and future worldwide threats to the national security of the United States.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, February 27, 2008, at 2:30 p.m., in room 253 of the Russell

Senate Office Building, in order to conduct a hearing.

The hearing will focus on the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's fiscal year 2009 budget proposal.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate in order to conduct a hearing on Wednesday, February 27, 2008, at 9:45 a.m., in room SD366 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building. At this hearing, the Committee will hear testimony to consider two nominations: Stanley C. Suboleski, of Virginia, to be an Assistant Secretary of Energy (Fossil Energy), vice Jeffrey D. Jarrett, resigned; and, J. Gregory Copeland, of Texas, to be General Counsel of the Department of Energy, vice David R. Hill.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Environment and Public Works be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, February 27, 2008 at 10:00 a.m. in room 406 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building in order to conduct a hearing entitled, ``Hearing on the President's Proposed EPA Budget for

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions be authorized to meet in executive session during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, February 27, 2008 at 10 a.m. in SD-430.

Agenda

S. 579, Breast Cancer and Environmental Research Act of 2007; S. 1810, Prenatally and Postnatally Diagnosed Conditions Awareness Act; S. 999, Stroke Treatment and Ongoing Prevention Act of 2007; S. 1760, Healthy Start Reauthorization Act of 2007; H.R. 20, Melanie Blocker- Stokes Postpartum Depression Research and Care Act; and S. 1042, Consistency, Accuracy, Responsibility, and Excellence in Medical Imaging and Radiation Therapy Act of 2007.

National Board for Education Sciences: Jonathan Baron, Frank Handy, Sally Shaywitz.

National Foundation on the Arts and Humanities: Jamsheed Choksy, Gary Glenn, David Hertz, Marvin Scott, Carol Swain.

National Museum and Library Science Board: Julia Bland, Jan Cellucci, William Hagenah, Mark Herring,

Truman Scholarship Foundation: Javaid Anwar, and Assistant Secretary of Labor ODEP: Neil Romano.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, February 27, 2008, at 10 a.m. in order to conduct a hearing entitled ``An Uneasy Relationship: U.S. Reliance on Private Security Firms in Overseas Operations.''

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Indian Affairs be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, February 27, at 9:30 a.m. in room 485 of the Russell Senate Office Building in order to conduct a hearing on S. 2232, the Foreign Aid Lessons for Domestic Economic Assistance Act of 2007.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate Committee on the Judiciary be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate, in order to conduct a hearing entitled ``The False Claims Act Correction Act (S. 2041): Strengthening the Government's Most Effective Tool Against Fraud for the 21st Century'' on Wednesday, February 27, 2008 at 10 a.m. in room SD-226 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building.

Witness List

Michael F. Hertz, Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Civil Division, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC.

Panel II: Tina M. Gonter, Jacksonville, FL; The Honorable John E. Clark, Of Counsel, Goode, Casseb, Jones, Riklin, Choate & Watson, P.C., San Antonio, TX; John T. Boese, Partner, Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson LLP, Washington, DC; and Pamela H. Bucy, Bainbridge Professor of Law, University of Alabama School of Law, Tuscaloosa, AL.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Rules and Administration be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, February 27, 2008, at 10:00 a.m., in order to hear testimony on Protecting Voters at Home and at the Polls: Limiting Abusive Robocalls and Vote Caging Practices.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate in order to conduct a hearing entitled ``The President's FY2009 Budget Request for the Small Business Administration on Wednesday, February 27, 2008, beginning at 10:00 a.m., in room 428A of the Russell Senate Office Building.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent for the Committee on Veterans' Affairs to be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, February 27, 2008, in order to conduct an oversight hearing entitled ``Review of Veterans' Disability Compensation: Expert Reports on PTSD and other issues.'' The Committee will meet in room 216 of the Hart Senate Office Building, at 9:30 a.m.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Personnel Subcommittee of the Committee on Armed Services be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, February 27, 2008, at 3:00 p.m., in open session to receive testimony on active component, reserve component, and civilian personnel programs in review of the defense authorization request for Fiscal Year 2009 and the Future Years Defense Program.

Madam Speaker, I want to thank the gentlelady from Wisconsin for yielding me this time on this very important matter.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 20, the Melanie Blocker-Stokes Postpartum Depression Research and Care Act.

I would like to thank Chairman Dingell; Ranking Member Barton; my colleague, Congressman Pitts; and the members of the Energy and Commerce Committee who unanimously supported this legislation's passage out of committee.

Madam Speaker, after 6 long, arduous years, today marks an important step in the protracted journey for Congress to recognize postpartum depression as a national priority. I am so proud that nearly 130 bipartisan cosponsors have united with me today to say no longer will postpartum depression be dismissed as mere ``baby blues.''

By passing H.R. 20, Congress will finally put significant money and attention into research, screening, treatment, and education for mothers suffering from this disease.

Sadly, Madam Speaker, I was moved to author H.R. 20 after watching the news accounts of the missing Melanie Stokes, a new mother, a successful businesswoman, and my constituent. Despite her family's valiant interventions, Melanie's psychosis was so severe that she slipped away from her family and from her friends and tragically ended her life.

Afterwards, I reached out to Melanie's mother, Carol Blocker, and was told of her daughter's diagnosis and suicide that occurred as a result of postpartum psychosis. And sometime later, Madam Speaker, I talked with Dr. Nada Stotland of the American Psychiatric Association, who is another constituent of mine, and she detailed the value in additional research. And she discussed the underreporting and mixed diagnosis of postpartum depression and psychosis in our country.

There is no denying, the needs for resources to combat postpartum depression grow more and more and more each year. Here are the facts, Madam Speaker:

Research indicates that some form of postpartum depression affects approximately one in 1,000 new mothers, resulting in up to 800,000 cases annually. Of the new postpartum cases this year, less than 15 percent of mothers will receive treatment. However, with treatment, over 90 percent of these mothers could overcome their depression. And approximately every 50 seconds, a new mother will begin struggling with the affects of mental illness.

Madam Speaker, these facts are profound. And in the words of Carol Blocker, ``Hundreds of thousands of women who have suffered from postpartum depression and psychosis are still waiting for this Congress to act 6 years after the legislation has been introduced.''

Madam Speaker, I want to thank you for this day, because today Ms. Blocker and hundreds of thousands of mothers will not have to wait any longer for Congress to act.

My legislation, to sum it up, would encourage the Secretary of Health and Human Services to further research at the National Institutes of Health on postpartum depression.

My legislation would also finance a national public awareness campaign to bring this illness out of the dark and shed new light on how to screen and treat mothers. It would also add depression to the biennial report the National Institutes of Health must submit to the Congress.

Lastly, my bill will finance much-needed grants to public and nonprofit organizations to establish and operate programs that provide screening, treatment and various health care and support services to individuals with postpartum depression or postpartum psychosis.

Moreover, Madam Speaker, this bill is an affordable approach to research and services. The CBO estimates that H.R. 20 costs less than $500,000 per year, and $18 million over 5 years.

This is good policy, Madam Speaker. This is good politics. And this is a good public health bill.

I want to take a moment, Madam Speaker, just to thank the many organizations and groups, groups like Postpartum Support International, whose president right now sits in the gallery, Ms. Susan Stone; the Family Mental Health Foundation; the American Psychological Association; the American Psychiatric Association; the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists; and groups like the Children's Defense Fund, the Melanie Blocker-Stokes Foundation, Suicide Prevention Action Network, Planned Parenthood Federation of America Depression and Bipolar Support Alliance, the Mental Health Alliance, NARAL, so many organizations, including the National Alliance for Mental Illness, the Community Behavioral Healthcare Association, and the March of Dimes. I want to thank these individuals and various activists for their testimony at hearings, for their support, and for their participation.

Madam Speaker, lastly, I want to thank the Members of this Congress, those who, when I asked to become cosponsors, they indicated that they were familiar because they had personal involvement, this dreaded disease has touched them personally; and I want to thank them for their support.

Madam Speaker, I urge that this body pass this much-needed legislation, that this body, indeed, give women the help that they need in fighting this very, very difficult disease.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Armed Services be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, March 5, 2008, at 9:30 a.m., in open session, In order to receive testimony on the Department of the Air Force in review of the Defense authorization request for fiscal year 2009 and the Future Years Defense Program.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate in order to conduct a business meeting on Wednesday, March 5, 2008, at 11:15 a.m., in room SD366 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building. At this mark-up, the Committee will consider the nomination of J. Gregory Copeland to be General Counsel of the Department of Energy.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate in order to conduct a hearing on Wednesday, March 5, 2008, at 3 p.m., In room SD366 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building. At this hearing, the Committee will hear testimony regarding the Impacts of the capability of the United States to maintain a domestic enrichment capability as a result of the recently initialed amendment between the United States and the Russian Federation of the Agreement Suspending the Antidumping Investigation on Uranium from the Russian Federation.

PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

Committee on Foreign Relations

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Foreign Relations be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, March 5, 2008, at 9:30 a.m in order to hold a hearing on strengthening national security through smart power.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions be authorized to meet in executive session during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, March 5, 2008 at 9:30 a.m. in SD-430.

Agenda

S. 1810, Prenatally and Postnatally Diagnosed Conditions Awareness Act; S. 999, Stroke Treatment and Ongoing Prevention Act of 2007; S. 1760, Healthy Start Reauthorization Act of 2007; H.R. 20, Melanie Blocker-Stokes Postpartum Depression Research and Care Act; and S. 1042, Consistency, Accuracy, Responsibility, and Excellence in Medical Imaging and Radiation Therapy Act of 2007.

National Board for Education Sciences, Jonathan Baron, Frank Handy, Sally Shaywitz; National Foundation on the Arts and Humanities, Jamsheed Choksy, Gary Glenn, David Hertz, Marvin Scott, Carol Swain; National Museum and Library Science Board, Julia Bland, Jan Cellucci, William Hagenah, Mark Herring; Truman Scholarship Foundation, Javaid Anwar; Assistant Secretary of Labor ODEP, Neil Romano.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions be authorized to meet, during the session of the Senate, in order to conduct a hearing entitled ``The Climbing Costs of Heating Homes: Why LIHEAP is Essential'' on Wednesday, March 5, 2008. The hearing will commence at 10:30 a.m. in room 430 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, March 5, 2008, at 9:30 a.m. in order to conduct a hearing entitled ``Census in Peril: Getting the 2010 Decennial Back on Track.''

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate Committee on the Judiciary be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate, in order to conduct a hearing entitled ``Oversight of the Federal Bureau of Investigation'' on Wednesday, March 5, 2008 at 10 a.m. in room SD-106 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building.

Witness list

The Honorable Robert S. Mueller, III, Director, Federal Bureau of Investigation, United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Personnel Subcommittee of the Committee on Armed Services be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, March 5, 2008, at 2:30 p.m., in open session in order to receive testimony on the findings and recommendations of the Department of Defense Task Force on Mental Health, the Army's Mental Health Advisory Team reports, and Department of Defense and service-wide improvements in mental health resources, including suicide prevention, for servicemembers and their families.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs' Subcommittee on Federal Financial Management, Government Information, Federal Services, and International Security be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, March 5, 2008, at 2:30 p.m. in order to conduct a hearing entitled, ``The State of the U.S. Postal Service One Year After Reform''.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Special Committee on Aging be authorized to meet tomorrow, Wednesday, March 5, 2008 from 10:30 a.m.-12:30 p.m. in Dirksen 562 for the purpose of conducting a hearing.